per share
include volume Apple 5.5m shares, Google about 1m and you have a bit more of the picture. I don't know TOO much about stocks, but I know that any company can split; doubling their number of shares and halving their value. There could be 10m shares of Google for $86 per share if they wanted to
(please correct me if I'm wrong, but be nice)

This is interesting because it comes from more of a consumer standpoint IMO.

The greater "value" lies in google. With all of the open source technologies they develop, and their view on their own patents, it seems as google actually brings more value to the technological community.

With Hadoop alone they have changed that way the Internet works, and don't charge a dime for it.

They're talking about monetary value as a company though which Apple definitely has because they make money from hardware as well as software and have ridiculous profit margins on their products compared to rival companies.

Google has as much of a cult following/"fanboys" as Apple does as this point. Both camps have a small group of people who use the technology to define who they are and who become very vocal defenders of "their" company.

As for the product thing, obviously there are more people who use Google than who own Apple products. Apple is expensive hardware/software even by technology standards and Google is almost entirely based around creating free online products and services (search engine, maps, G+, gmail, drive, etc.). They're two completely different companies with very different products and different profit models. It's comparing apples to oranges (pun very much intended).

All I was saying is that in terms of monetary value Apple is the more valuable company. The reason they have come to be worth so much is that they're selling their own hardware and software and have managed to retain ridiculous profit margins for most of their product line. Google may very well over take Apple in the future but at the end of the day they're both wildly profitable and innovative companies who bring a lot to the technology world and without whom we almost certainly wouldn't have the level of technology that we enjoy today.

Being the most valuable brand in the world doesn't rely just on innovation and market share alone. Apple has some very important things going for them. Customer satisfaction ratings, profit share, revenue, best selling hardware sales...

And really, don't waste your emotions on a company. That's a pretty silly. They are tools. People should really stop identifying themselves by the tools they use. MacBooks are excellent computers and Google engineers understand that.

I dunno about that. If a computer/tech company had business practises that were holding back the whole industry then i'd say thats enough reason to hate them. Im not saying this is what Apple is doing though, im just saying there can be reasons to hate a tech company.

(In my experience) Apple users are always very defensive, proud and have some weird passion about the brand. But yeah, I'm willing to recognize some of their products are very neat and I can totally understand why someone would like Mac OS.
The product itself is good, it's their weird religious aura I can't stand.

The actual results of that study, is that in ONE person looking at pictures of Apple products, it caused the part of their brain that handles visual stimuli to fire off. If you look at an Android phone, or anything you find visually appealing, then it would fire off the exact same part of your brain.

You really shouldn't believe everything you read as portrayed. That is something a religious fanatic does.

If I had read that about eh.. Porsche, I wouldn't have believed it. But this is very consistent with my experience with Apple fanboys. Ergo I don't believe everything I read, but I really believe this is somewhat true.

I really have to disagree with you : looking at "something nice" and thinking of Jesus (for a catholic person) does not feel the same.

Your experience, or what you have read on the internet? In my experience, Apple fanboys are no different than Android fanboys, Microsoft fanboys, Linux fanboys, etc. They all have blind devotion to their chosen brand/technology, and go blind to the fanatics on their side of the fence.

looking at "something nice" and thinking of Jesus (for a catholic person) does not feel the same.

What it feels like is irrelevant. It is about what part of your brain is used. You really should look into how the human brain and the different cortexes work.

You can hate many things at once. Computer companies aren't just computer companies anymore. Back in the 90s, I'd say you were right. Today, however, they have big, real world effects on our future. Every dollar you spend on Apple is a vote for a future where one company controls how you use your computer, what apps you are allowed to use, what hardware you use, and what accessories you use. Every dollar you spend on Google and Android is a vote for a future of innovation, of true competition, choice, etc.

It really makes a big difference, and having the attitude that it doesn't and that it's silly and immature to dislike a company that makes computers or phones IS silly and immature.

Every dollar you spend on Google and Android is a vote for a future of innovation, of true competition, choice, etc.

Any more buzz words you want to throw in there? Why is a world full of the same OS with just varaition true competition? Seems to me we have plenty of choice and true competition as all the major phone camps are wildly different.

Android is only open by necessity as a platform for what they make their money on, which is their services. Notice how their apps are closed source. If they were really the white knights of open source and innovation, those apps would be open as well. The likely truth is that if Android was a hardware company, Android would probably be closed off as well. It is business 101. You close off what you make money on. Apple closes their hardware to keep you buying their hardware.

Both Apple and Google use different ways to keep people consuming their products. Neither is better or worse (except in the minds of blind fanatics on either side), just different ways to go.

Time to grow up and move away from blind coroporate worship people. They all only care about your money.

Just because it is called Android doesn't make it the same OS. There IS no Android, aside from stock. There are only OSes based on Android. I'm not sure how you can't seen how a world based on only Android wouldn't be way more competitive. Small start ups can take it and use it for new phones and automatically have an amazing OS and a million apps without having to start another OS from scratch or pay for one. Consumers can easily switch from one phone to another without being locked in to one ecosystem. There are many many reasons.

As Omni_Ziltoid said, if google were a hardware company, android would be closed source as well. They use open source as a way to pull in suckers who believe they must use android because of ethics and shit.

That makes no sense. Yes, if Google were a hardware company, it probably would be closed source. However, it isn't. I'm not saying that Google would always do the right thing no matter what. I'm saying that Google has done the right thing because that is how they make their money.

Again, you and OZ have done nothing to convince me that Android isn't more ethical, other than say "it's for suckers who believe in ethics and shit."

And I'm not saying that webkit is bad or that other companies don't do good things when they can. All I originally said was that Android is more ethical and promotes a great deal of competition between companies in a ton of ways, and that closed source OSes like iOS and WP do not. I fail to see how Google making money off of that makes that incorrect,

It doesn't matter which platform they use for computers, I don't see why they don't just use chromebooks but to them its Windows (Microsoft) vs Mac (Apple) and choosing one or the other makes no difference to them.

For the most part, you can't use Windows for your day to day work unless you have a very special reason. There's just too much trouble involved. Linux is the only solution for engineering, with visual designers using Macs. MacBooks and Chromebooks are often seen as e-mail machines.

Googlers don't use chromebooks because until the Pixel came out, the chromebooks just weren't that amazing. Now I'm seeing chromebooks replace macbooks more and more each day.

Since you are with Google, I think you guys should use Chromebook at least in public events. It was quite funny to see that Google gives away 6,000 Chromebook Pixels but doesn't use the device on stage just for the sake or promoting it. I think it's not impossible to run the entire presentation from Chromebook.

My point is, it's Google's product and Google should be the first to promote them. I'm personally a fan of Chromebook as a second choice though I'm waiting for a possible second generation to Samsung Series 3 one (any idea?). I think these devices have potential, but Google isn't promoting it that well.

I'm not the person who decides these things. Engineers have a certain workflow and disrupting them just to make it look good isn't really the Google way. I imagine that we want engineers who use a Pixel to actually use it because they love it, not because we mandate it.

We let our engineers run around with iPhones too. Google makes a lot of iOS software, and we still gotta support webkit and Chrome on OSX. I don't think we'll be acting like Mac doesn't exist any time soon.

I have no comment on a Samsung Series 3. I don't even work in that division, and the machinations of our partners are generally not known to me. If I did know, I wouldn't be able to tell you.

You're taking it to the wrong direction. I certainly didn't imply that you 'should' do anything about this. I'm just letting you know my opinion. Nor did I imply that Google should force its employees to use its products. What I meant was that Google should at least use Chromebooks in public events because I believe you too understand that if Google uses its machines on stage, a lot of 'general consumers' will feel attracted to it. It won't dramatically increase the sales of these devices, but it will definitely show that low-to-mid-level work can be done with a Chromebook.